Roblox CEO David Baszucki said virtual workspaces are not as "engaging, collaborative, and productive as physical spaces," and it "needed to get back to working in person."
    • Zorg@lemmings.world
      0·
      2 years ago

      I blame all the managers who struggle to create remotely engaging virtual meetings, and who count the majority of their team’s productivity based on how many hours they can see them sitting at their desk🙄

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    26·
    2 years ago

    I was given an ultimatum like this once, to do X or resign, and I chose not to do X and refused to resign, and I worked there for an additional nine months until I found something better. I did have to endure several meetings where they kept saying I “needed” to resign or comply, but they never fired me. Said I would get a bad reference, but since that’s extremely risky on the company’s part, I still used them as a reference. HR dgaf. They just know they can’t say anything negative about a previous employee. The whole thing is absurd posturing.

      • BradleyUffner@lemmy.worldEnglish
        3·
        2 years ago

        Companies seem to be afraid of getting sued by the previous employee over it. I’m not sure what the claim would be though… Maybe defamation?

        • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
          3·
          2 years ago

          Defamation/slander/libel kind of thing with damages estimated based on anticipated earning potential over the course of time you might have been employed by the job they inhibited you from getting. That means that HR or whoever is called for the reference needs to be 100% accurate and provably correct about every single thing they say about the former employee.

          From a risk management viewpoint for the company there is basically no gain whatsoever for preventing an employee getting another job, it requires flawless execution, often from random people in HR, and the potential downside is the above, which could be million(s)-dollar damages.

          Basically: a bad referral is very high risk, minimal/no upside, and tremendous downside. HR simply reports demonstrable facts (whether employed at the company, from when to when), none of which is subject to interpretation.

          If you’ve REALLY pissed someone off in HR and they want to give you a bad reference, the most they might do is state yes they worked here from X to Y and ask the potential employer if they have other applicants, but even that is just pointless risk from the standpoint of the company.

    • zoly@lemmy.world
      9·
      2 years ago

      They will, with only a month of severance. Their goal is to cut cost, these are layoffs

  • Iwasondigg@lemmy.one
    0·
    2 years ago

    Many companies are doing this. They’re OK with the attrition. Acceptable losses as far as they’re concerned. I suppose it’s their right. I hope those that quit over it find better jobs.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        0·
        2 years ago

        Exactly.

        My own experience in IT with companies which were even just starting to talk about layoffs is that the people who can much more easilly find new jobs - typically the better ones and the ones with hard to find or in more demand expertises - are the ones who leave first, often preemptivelly (though it does depend on their chances to get compensation for being dismissed and how much, so for example in certail legal jurisdictions were compensation depends on years employed there, you might seen the best of the newer employes just take off whilst the ones with many years there hold on for compensation because it’s worth it for them).

        In fact if you’re going to do cuts you better have the list of positions which are going to be cut already planned because in that period of uncertaintly between knowing there will be layoffs and knowing who is going to be kicked out is when those people who can easilly find another job will leave, if only because that removes the uncertainy of if and when they’ll stop getting paid, reduces the risk of a gap between jobs and even lets you take your time when searching for a new job and thus get a better one (if you’re kicked out whilst still having bills to pay being selective about your new job is sometimes not possible).

        Even were such effects only impact a small number of employees, it’s never the least useful ones that leave preemptivelly.

        In this specific case with an ultimatum of the “do this thing that’s going to be worse fo you because I say so, or else” kind, that’s just going to give more reason for the ones who can leave more easilly to leave.